Avatar vs Bloodbath

Been playing around a little with Avatar lately, and kinda like it. Theres a few fights where we cant get the full effect of bloodbath, like Megara where heads dies too fast etc.. But is BB still better, on fights where we can get the full effect of it?

I have no idea of theorycrafting and so on.. so looking for advice.

Im raiding 25hc, with 4set and ilvl 533- fury.

We are 2 warriors, so on pull, im popping banner + avatar and after banner is off, then reck (with 2. warriors banner). Is this the way to do it ? Or just stay with BB. Also, would glyphing reck and pop it together with banner be a better solution ?

i do, but the crit dmg is shared. So i imagine having 60-70%ish crit together with 20% crit dmg for almost full avatar duration, is better than having 100%ish crit for 10secs. But im not sure, so thats why im asking

In all simulations I have seen to date, Bloodbath manages to pull better numbers. You might not get that oh-shit-300k-crit feeling, but the BB ticks ramp up to insane levels.

As far as I am concerned, glyphing Recklessness is only useful if you cannot combine it with skullbanner for some reasons. Otherwise, don´t glyph it. Also, you should both (the other warrior and you) use your own Recklessness + Bloodbath + Skullbanner to ensure enough RB proccs in your initial CS window.

Originally Posted by Ryan Cailan Ebonheart

I've done nothing wrong. I'm not the one with the problem its everyone else that has a problem with me.

Yellow damage is 75% of our damage overall, but is very likely 85% of our damage during time-frames when we are using bloodbath; aka colossus smash and the few gcds right after. I'll split the difference and err on the side of caution, and say that yellow damage is 80% of our damage.

So Bloodbath effectively is a (0.8*.3) 24% damage increase for 12 seconds, and can be used 3 times more than avatar, for a total of 36 seconds every 3 minutes.

So we're comparing a 24% damage increase for 36 seconds to a 20% damage increase for 24 seconds.

1.24 * 36 seconds = 44.64
1.20 * 24 seconds = 28.80

44.64*x=28.80
x= 0.645
1 - 0.645 = 0.355

In order for bloodbath to be equal to avatar, 35.5% of the additional damage from bloodbath itself will need to be "lost." We'll assume that the "Bleed" effect does completely equal ticks every second, that would mean that the target needs to die 6.5 seconds before bloodbath is finished bleeding for avatar to be a better talent. This is probably an overestimate, as a majority of the bloodbath damage is "Bled" out from the 6-12 mark, and comparatively little of the damage is bled out 12-18 seconds after being used.

This isn't including that bloodbath lines up better with colossus smash, with a total uptime of 6.5 seconds every use, 54%, compared to Avatar, which has an uptime of 10.5 seconds every use if you nail the timing on your 2nd colossus smash perfectly, which ends up being 44% uptime.

Also, wouldn't there be "lost" time on megeara if you use avatar? You are kind of twiddling your thumbs for a few seconds after killing a head. You can also just not use bloodbath when the head is going to die in the next 10-15 seconds, and instead save it for the rampage when you're spamming the crap out of heroic strike.

There are other factors that I'm not mentioning as they are mostly not in favor of Avatar.

TLDR: Bloodbath is better. It would take incredibly specific circumstances for bloodbath to not be better than avatar.... most (if not all) of which can be avoided by not using bloodbath on targets that die in <10 seconds.

I still do think avatar have a few fights where its viable. Actually Megara was a bad example, because im not using avatar on heads, but on adds (with bladestorm), but same thing goes for Horidon, where optimising bb on adds would be a problem, and the best choice might be avatar (unless you wanna use it on horidon..).

I still do think avatar have a few fights where its viable. Actually Megara was a bad example, because im not using avatar on heads, but on adds (with bladestorm), but same thing goes for Horidon, where optimising bb on adds would be a problem, and the best choice might be avatar (unless you wanna use it on horidon..).

Anyways i got my answer, what makes the best numbers.

Four out of my ten bloodbaths on H. Horridon were on Horridon himself. You spend a lot of time in the last phase, and bloodbath has more than enough time to tick on the "main" adds that drop on each door. (Wastewalkers, venom priests, frostorbdudes, shamanbears) It takes about 15-20 seconds to kill them most of the time unless someone focuses some massive cds on one of them.

I literally don't think there is a fight this tier that Avatar would be better than Bloodbath. The lightning balls are the closest example that I can think of, but they die so quickly that wasting avatar on them is a little silly.

You can always line up bloodbath and your hardest hitting ability (except execute): dragonroar. So either increasing one dragonroar with avatar (+20%) out of three or having all three ticking for a decent (+30%) amount of extra damage. And you won't get two full cs-cycles into a single avatar timeframe while you can get three cs cycles into bloodbath.

Strong part about avatar: it covers your cooldowns (assuming you've 4 piece), mogu potion and trinket (feather procc) and covers a bigger timeframe during bloodlust. And it's stronger on burstphases as well.

Originally Posted by CollisionTD

I literally don't think there is a fight this tier that Avatar would be better than Bloodbath.

It's strong on Megaera when you want to burn the two red heads but in general i've to agree.